Rising fascism in the US

Reply Mon 7 May, 2018 06:44 am


Larry King, one of America’s best-known interviewers, who now hosts Politicking on RT America, interviewed Trump himself. After introducing the then–GOP nominee as a “good friend,” King proceeded to push back against Trump on a number of issues, including his “secret plan” to defeat ISIS.

Ed Schultz, who hosts News with Ed Schultz, also routinely ran segments that criticized Trump. “Who’s gonna stop Donald Trump!?” pleaded Schultz before a segment on how the GOP was worried about the reality-TV star’s unstoppable rise. Schultz also aired an interview with Bernie Sanders, who lambasted Trump’s bigotry and sexism and called Clinton “far and away the superior candidate”.

Lesser-known names on RT America have also criticized Trump on-air. Lee Camp, who hosts the satirical show Redacted Tonight, has mocked Trump relentlessly, calling one segment on climate change: “Why Donald Trump Is Dangerous For All Humanity.”

A simple look through RT America’s YouTube channel throws up numerous clips in which guests refer to Trump as misogynistic, bigoted, and racist. Guests on RT America have also claimed Trump does not stand up for regular workers, that his presidency would be exceedingly harmful to the markets, that he is not to be trusted on Social Security, and that his election could be more threatening to the global economy than ISIS. A political psychologist invited on to discuss whether Trump was a “textbook narcissist” called Trump “unstable.”

RT America has also critically covered Trump’s plans to “load up Guantánamo” with “bad dudes,” run negative segments on his personal taxes, reported on Latinos fearing deportation of friends and family, criticized his joke about assassinating Hillary Clinton, covered controversy around his choice of Steve Bannon as chief strategist and run segments calling both his health-care and foreign-policy plans lacking in detail.

It would be hard to describe any of this as Trump promotion.

If RT can be accused of trying to influence the American public, it certainly was not by feeding them a steady diet of pro-Trump information. It would be fairer to say RT tried to influence its viewers by airing coverage consistently critical of the American democratic system and process in general—and unfortunately for US intelligence agencies—there is no crime in that.

If RT’s critical reporting on the United States is factual—and not even the intelligence report is claiming that it isn’t—then it’s no different to any other channel with an editorial slant, albeit one with far less influence on the American public than mainstream US channels. The disparagement of RT as a Vladimir Putin–controlled engine for pro-Trump propaganda boils down to anger over the fact that the American journalists who work for RT have the audacity to shine a light on unflattering aspects of the American political system.
0 Replies
Reply Mon 7 May, 2018 07:01 am
From the preceding post:

It would be fairer to say RT tried to influence its viewers by airing coverage consistently critical of the American democratic system and process in general—and unfortunately for US intelligence agencies—there is no crime in that.

Reply Wed 16 May, 2018 04:37 am
Don't try to criticize the Russian "democracy" on RT though...
0 Replies
Reply Thu 17 May, 2018 10:36 am
I’m astonished at this news.

Looks like France is throwing elbows at the US, aspiring to worst policy toward ‘minorities.’

Get a load of this: France wants to change wording in religious books.

YOU THINK LIFE is bad for Muslims in Trump’s America? Spare a thought for the Muslims of France.

Over the past few years, they have been collectively blamed, and punished, for a series of horrific terror attacks carried out in France by so-called jihadists. The latest, a knife attack in Paris by a man shouting “Allahu akbar,” killed one person and injured four others last weekend.

While anti-Muslim bigotry has become a hallmark of the Republican right in America, in France it is a truly bipartisan affair. Islamophobia is peddled by the left and right alike, with both socialists and conservatives falling over one another to defend French secularism, or laïcité, by demonizing French Muslims.

Join Our Newsletter
Original reporting. Fearless journalism. Delivered to you.

I’m in
Consider: Successive French governments have criminalized the face veil and banned the headscarf in schools. French mayors have targeted Muslim women who want to cover up at the beach and Muslim school kids who try to have a pork-free lunch. The French president — and new liberal heartthrob — Emmanuel Macron has introduced draconian counterterror legislation that United Nations human rights experts have warned could have a discriminatory impact on Muslims in particular.

And the latest big idea? To go after the Quran. On April 21, the newspaper Le Parisien published a manifesto “against the new anti-Semitism,” signed by 300 public figures — ranging from former President Nicolas Sarkozy and former Prime Minister Manuel Valls, to actor Gérard Depardieu and singer Charles Aznavour. According to The Atlantic, the manifesto states that “11 Jews have been assassinated — and some tortured — by radical Islamists” in France, and demands that “the verses of the Quran calling for murder and punishment of Jews, Christians, and nonbelievers be struck to obsolescence by religious authorities,” so that “no believer can refer to a sacred text to commit a crime.”

Such rhetoric is a reflection both of Gallic bigotry and sheer stupidity, a toxic combination of ignorance and privilege.

First, where are these Muslim “religious authorities” who would be willing to do to the Quran what Thomas Jefferson did to the Bible? Establishment-friendly French imams, such as Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris, and Tareq Oubrou, imam of Bordeaux’s Grand Mosque, have denounced the manifesto as “unbelievable and unfair” and “nearly blasphemous.” And were such mainstream figures to even agree to edit the Quran — believed by Muslims to be the literal word of God! — does anyone really believe that the fanatics of the Islamic State or Al Qaeda would give a damn?

Second, violent extremism isn’t a product of scripture. Contrary to conventional wisdom, and as I have argued in the past while citing a raft of studies and experts, religious faith “isn’t a crucial factor” in terror attacks — or in the process of so-called radicalization. Why, then, obsess over Quranic verses? As the French journalist Didier Francois, who was held hostage by ISIS in Syria, told CNN in 2015: “There was never really discussion about texts or — it was not a religious discussion. It was a political discussion. … Because it has nothing to do with the Quran.” Or, as his fellow former French hostage, Nicolas Henin, has said, “I noticed that these jihadists have little to do with … Arab or Muslim culture — they are children of our societies. … They are products of our culture, our world.”

Who do you take more seriously? Two former ISIS hostages? Or the guy from “Green Card“?

Third, how can the manifesto signatories be so sure that it is French Muslims who are behind the rise of this “new anti-Semitism”? As a 2016 study of anti-Semitic hate crimes in France by Human Rights First noted, “Perpetrators of most antisemitic violence are perceived to be of ‘Muslim culture or origin’ … although there is no data to substantiate this conclusion—in part because of the prohibition in France on collecting ‘ethnic’ statistics.” Yet in next-door Germany, where such statistics are collected by the police, nine out of 10 anti-Semitic hate crimes in 2017 were carried out not by radicalized Muslims, but by “members of far-right or neo-Nazi groups.”

FOURTH, WHAT EVIDENCE is there that the Quran itself is anti-Semitic? Or that Islam has a particular problem with Jews? Critics often point to verses of the Muslim holy book that express hostility towards Jews, while ignoring the specific historical and theological context for such verses, and also ignoring those many other Quranic verses which heap praise on Jewish people.

As the Princeton University historian Mark Cohen, an expert on Jewish-Muslim relations, points out: “Islam contains a nucleus of pluralism that gave the Jews in Muslim lands greater security than Jews had in Christian Europe,” and therefore, “Jews in the Islamic orbit were spared the damaging stigma of ‘otherness’ and anti-Semitism suffered by Jews in Europe.” Modern-day Muslim and Arab anti-Semitism is a consequence of colonialism, conflicting nationalisms, and the clash with Zionism, argues Cohen, and is neither “indigenous” to the Middle East, nor “inherent” in Islam.

Fifth, why single out Islamic scripture in this way? Why not Jewish or Christian scripture, too? Are we supposed to pretend that the Old Testament of the Bible doesn’t contain scores of verses that incite violence and hatred against nonbelievers? Or, that those verses haven’t been used to justify heinous crimes in recent years? Against Palestinians, Iraqis, Ugandans, Norwegian kids, and American abortion clinics, among others?

To avoid the charge of hypocrisy, therefore, will the signatories to this manifesto, who include France’s chief rabbi Haim Korsia, also call for verses of the Bible to be “struck to obsolescence by religious authorities”?

Sixth, whatever happened to the “liberté” part of “liberté, égalité, fraternité“? How is the insistence on removing verses from the Quran compatible with religious freedom (a crucial, if less discussed, part of the French secular tradition)? How is it compatible with freedom of speech or expression? Whatever happened to the land of “Je Suis Charlie“? Well, guess what? The manifesto was drafted by, of all people, Philippe Val, the former managing editor of Charlie Hebdo. Irony, it seems, may have died a quiet death in France.
0 Replies

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/21/2018 at 03:10:08